Britishness: a Role for the State?

Abstract

In recent years the UK government has adopted a broad but ill-de®ned role in relation to Britishness. It compels those who want to become citizens to participate in citizenship ceremonies which`re¯ectwhich`re¯ect our national character'. 1 It provides new immigrants with a description of what it means to be British. 2 Cabinet ministers Jack Straw and John Denham both argue that anìnclusive British history' needs to be taught to schoolchildren to cultivate a sense of Britishness, and of course Gordon Brown has made numerous speeches on this subject also. 3 At times Conservatives seem more sceptical about any role for government in this area. Hence David Cameron criticises Gordon Brown's `top down approach to patriotism' 4 and his willingness tòinstitutionalise Britishness'. 5 This seeming di€erence between the government and the Conservatives illustrates that those who run the state can adopt di€erent roles when it comes to Britishness. They can bèhands o€ ' or act as its custodian, they can try to change the British identity or they can encourage people to remain true to it. But any acceptable role would be one that seemed justi®ed, and in this article we explain why, when it comes to Britishness, a justi®able role for those who run the state is to use the latter to clarify what British people share. 6 We show why this role is justi®ed in three stages. First, we explain what we mean by Britishness, being British and the British identity (all of which we use interchangeably). Second, we explain why if those who run the state use it to clarify what British people share, they are justi®ed to do so. Third, we show why the objections against such a role are unconvincing, after which we conclude. What is Britishness? Politicians, journalists and academics often emphasise the importance of Britishness but it is seldom clear what they are emphasising. Hence Bhikhu Parekh says: I do not quite know what the word [Britishness] means. It is also rather striking that we seem to be one of the few countries in the world to use that expression. No one talks about`Americannessabout`Americanness', `Canadianness', `Frenchness', `Indianness' or`Germanor`German-ness'. 7 The confusion over Britishness is made worse by some thinking that it is a `state identity'. 8 They argue that Britain is not a nation but a state, a collection of legal and political structures which control what some, perhaps following Max Weber, calìthe legitimate powers of coercion' in the United Kingdom. 9